RAVULA POCHAMMA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KARIMNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the widow of one Ravula Narasimha of Bejjanki village, Kariinnagar district. Ravula Narasimha applied on 15-7-74 to the Central Government seeking pension on the ground that he was a freedom fighter. He claimed in that application that he was prosecuted for participating in freedom movement and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for one year and three months and actually he suffered imprisonment for a period of seven months and eighteen days. He died in 1983. As no pension was granted to him, the present petitioner his widow filed Writ Petition No. 11199/90 seeking a direction to the respondents herein for payment of arrears of pension under the Swatantra Sainik Sanrnan Scheme, 1980 due to her late husband. That Writ Petition was disposed of by a learned single Judge on 6-8-90 with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner said to have been made in 1986 as well as the second representation dt: 22-11-87 and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. In compliance with the above direction the Government of India, the 2nd respondent herein passed an order on 24-1-91 in Ref: No. 12/3540/73 FF Hyd. Cell informing the petitioner herein as follows: In your representation dated March 1986 you have claimed that some of the co-accused of your late husband have been sanctioned pension. In this con nection, it is stated that the cases of two co-accused of your husband, namely Sri Vodnala Kashaiah and Sri Deekonda Narayana have been re-examined and found that the both were released on 12-12-57 after completing their full jail period wherein your late husband who himself produced a jail certificate according to which he was released on 1-9-57 F without completing his jail period on tendering apology (mafinama) which is against the spirit of National Freedom Movement and disqualification for grant of pension under the Pension Scheme and orders issued thereunder. Your late husband's application for grant of pension was rejected on these grounds, vide this Ministry's letter of even number dt: 20-6-73. It is regretted that it is not possible to accede to your request for grant of family pension.

(2.) The present Writ Petition was filed seeking a mandamous declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the above proceedings was void and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents 10 grant freedom fighters' pension to the petitioner pursuant to the application made by her late husband on 15-7-74- and the representations made by her in March, 1986 and on 22-11-87.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that tendering of apology by a person during the period of his imprisonment will not disentitled him to claim pension as a freedom fighter In the present case Ravula Narasimha died as far back as 1983 and therefore it is not possible for the petitioner to place before this Court the circumstances under, "which Ravula Narasimha tendered apology. What everimay be the circumstances as he was awarded 'Tamrapatra' which'is not disputed by the other side, his window the petitioner herein who is aged 80 years should not be deprived of the benefit of the freedom fighters pension, her late husband was entitle to,